Americans who received swine flu vaccines are at risk for paralysis disorders
by Jonathan Benson, staff writer
(NaturalNews) The federal government has once again been exposed for lying about the safety of the infamous swine flu vaccine, also known as H1N1. According to a new study published in the journal The Lancet, people who received the swine flu vaccine during the 2009-2010 pandemic hoax were at an elevated risk of developing a potentially-deadly paralysis disorder known as Guillain-Barre syndrome, or GBS.
Based on data collected from six different adverse event reporting systems, including the core vaccine safety datalink and several new surveillance systems created by Medicare and the U.S. Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs, researchers found that among the 23 million people who were vaccinated during the scare, an additional 1.6 cases of GBS were observed per one million people vaccinated.
According to statistics presented by TIME.com, one in 100,000 people is said to develop GBS, which is a relatively small amount overall. But the widespread issuance of the H1N1 vaccine was responsible for triggering an additional 77 reported cases of the autoimmune disorder, some of which manifested up to 91 days after individuals received the vaccine.
The findings contrast sharply with false reassurances made back in 2009 by many so-called medical experts. Dr. Paul A. Offit, the infamous “vaccine expert” who outspokenly believes children can safely receive 10,000 vaccinations at once without issue, is quoted in a 2009 article in The New York Times (NYT) as doubting any link between the swine flu vaccine and GBS.
But the numbers speak for themselves, and they more than likely represent just a small fraction of the total number of vaccine injuries caused by the swine flu vaccine. After all, adverse event reporting systems are believed to represent as few as one percent of the total number of vaccineinjuries that actually occur, the vast majority of which never get reported.
Nearly every single flu shot study used to justify phony approval of H1N1 vaccine flawed, says doctor
As many readers will recall, the H1N1 vaccine was never properly safety tested in the first place. Health authorities claimed that existing studies onflu shots were enough to validate the safety and effectiveness of the swine flu shot, even though it contains a unique blend of viral components and adjuvants that differs from the annual flu shot.
But as explained by Dr. Thomas Jefferson, coordinator for the Cochrane Vaccine Field in Rome, Italy, most of the existing flu studies are flawed. According to information presented by truth-seeker Gary Null, a mere five percent of vaccine studies are reliable, and the other 95 percent do not hold water.
“This should not come as a great surprise; even CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) officials were forced to confess that ‘influenza vaccines are still among the least effective immunizing agents available, and this seems to be particularly true for elderly recipients,’” explains Null in an article on the subject published earlier this year.
That was confirmed recently by the CDC itself, which admitted that annual flu shots provide little or no protection for people over 65 years of age, which is the primary target group for the vaccine. And a CDC study released several years ago made plain the fact that fewer than two percent of people in general derive any real protection from flu shots, while many more suffer serious and potentially life-threatening side effects.
Sources for this article include:
America’s Most Wanted: ’The Most Dangerous Woman in the World”
The Truth about Aafiah sidqui
Aafia Siddiqui was once considered a brilliant scientist. Then the US government called her the new face of al-Qaida — a Pakistani woman who ranked among America’s top terrorism suspects. Now the MIT-educated mother of three is in custody, claiming her long disappearance was a wrongful abduction by the CIA.
On July 17, 2008, men coming from evening prayers at the Bazazi Mosque in Ghazni, a provincial capital south of Kabul, paused when they saw a woman outside the building. They formed a circle around the stranger, who was wearing a blue burqa. She was cowering on the ground, with two small bags at her side, holding the hand of a boy of about 12. One of the men, fearing that this peculiar woman could be carrying a bomb under her burqa, called the police.
A short time later, more than 11,000 kilometers (6,800 miles) away, a telephone rang at the headquarters of the Federal Bureau of Intelligence (FBI) in Washington. Someone crossed the name Aafia Siddiqui from a list of suspects and wrote the word “arrested.”
After two weeks Aafia Siddiqui was flown from the US Air Force’s Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan to New York. She was now wearing a tracksuit, had two bullet entry wounds in her abdomen and weighed around 40 kilograms (90 lbs.). Siddiqui is 1.63 meters (5’4″) tall.
On Aug. 11, Siddiqui appeared at a hearing before a US federal court in Manhattan. She sat in a wheelchair, with a scarf pulled over her head. In October she was taken to the Carswell Psychiatric Center in Fort Worth, Texas for a psychological assessment.
Siddiqui is a Pakistani citizen and mother of three children. Born on March 2, 1972, she was the most-wanted woman in the world for four years. The FBI considered her so dangerous that former Attorney General John Ashcroft placed her — the only woman — on his “Deadly Seven” list. The American press nicknamed Siddiqui the terrorist organization al-Qaida’s “Mata Hari” and its “female genius.” She’s believed to have raised money for al-Qaida by collecting donations and smuggling diamonds.
“She is the most important catch in five years,” former CIA terrorist hunter John Kiriakou said when she was apprehended. The odd thing about Siddiqui’s case is that she has not been charged now with being a collaborator or accomplice in terrorist attacks, but with the attempted murder of US soldiers and FBI agents — whom she allegedly attacked with a weapon in Afghanistan. If convicted, she could face up to 20 years in prison.
The charges against Siddiqui are spectacular because she is a woman. Western life is also not alien to her: She comes from an upper middle-class Pakistani family and spent more than 10 years studying at elite universities in the United States. She studied biology on a scholarship at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and earned a PhD in neuroscience at Brandeis University, where she was considered an outstanding scientist.
Five years ago, Siddiqui disappeared from her home in Karachi, together with her three children, Ahmed, 7, Mariam, 5, and Suleman, 6 months. The two older children are American citizens. Siddiqui claims that Americans abducted her and locked her away in a secret prison, and that she was tortured there. Her children, she says, were taken away, and two of them are still missing.
The CIA denies that its agents had anything to do with Siddiqui’s disappearance. Michael Scheuer, a member of a unit that pursued al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden from 1996 to 1999, says curtly: “We never arrested or imprisoned a woman. She is a liar.” But if it is true that a woman was tortured and disappeared into a secret dungeon, it would be a first in the post-September 11 world — and yet another example of the decay of standards in America.
The Secret Prisoner
On March 1, 2003, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the chief planner of the Sept. 11 attacks, was arrested in the Pakistani city of Rawalpindi — the biggest catch to date in the battle against al-Qaida. He was interrogated by the CIA at an undisclosed location, where he revealed aspects of the inner world of internal terrorism. A series of arrests began a short time later, and it is believed that Mohammed also mentioned Siddiqui’s name. For the CIA, any name Mohammed mentioned was automatically an important al-Qaida terrorist.
On that same March 1, Siddiqui sent an email from Karachi to her professor, Robert Sekuler, at Brandeis University outside Boston. She was looking for a job. “I would prefer to work in the United States,” she wrote, noting that there were no jobs in Karachi for a woman with her educational background. A few days later, Siddiqui disappeared. Early in the morning on the day of her disappearance, she left her parents’ house, together with her three children and not very much luggage. She took a taxi to the airport to catch a morning flight to Islamabad, where she had planned to visit her uncle.
Siddiqui says she was kidnapped that day, on her way to the airport. She says her abductors took away Ahmed, Mariam and the baby. The last thing she remembers, she says, was receiving an injection in her arm. She says that when she regained consciousness she was in a prison cell, which she believes was on a military base in Afghanistan, because she heard aircraft taking off and landing. She claims that she was held in solitary confinement for more than five years, and that it was always the same Americans who interrogated her, without masks or uniforms. For days, she says, they would play tape recordings of her children’s terrified screams, and she claims that she was forced to write hundreds of pages about the construction of dirty bombs and attacks using viruses.
The baby, Suleman, was taken away immediately, she says. They showed her a photograph of Ahmed, the seven-year-old, lying in a pool of blood. The only one of her children they occasionally showed her, she says, was Mariam — as a vague outline behind a pane of frosted glass.
Could this story be true?
Several Pakistani media outlets did report her arrest. A year after her disappearance, Dawn, a daily newspaper normally considered to have good sources, quoted a spokesman from the Pakistani interior ministry saying that Siddiqui was arrested in Karachi and later handed to the Americans. On April 21, 2003, the US television network NBC ran a story about Siddiqui’s arrest on the evening news.
Pakistani intelligence sources report that Siddiqui was in Pakistani detention until the end of 2003 and that her son Suleman fell ill and died during that time. It is known that terrorism suspects often spend a period of time in the country before being turned over to the Americans. According to the Asian Human Rights Commission, there are 52 secret prisons in the country, into which thousands of Pakistanis are believed to have disappeared since the beginning of the war on terrorism.
A number of other prisoners held at Bagram Air Base, the site of the most important US detainee camp in Afghanistan, say they heard a woman screaming. Some claim two women were there. The woman was nicknamed the “gray lady of Bagram.”
Elaine Whitfield Sharp, an attorney who has represented the family since 2003, is convinced that Siddiqui was classified as a high-level prisoner and spent five years in a so-called “black site” in Bagram — in one of these notorious black holes in the legal system.
An Excellent Student
But who is Aafia Siddiqui? Her sister, Fauzia Siddiqui, pulls out several photo albums that she hopes will help answer this question. The books are filled with images of garden parties, family gatherings and children’s birthdays. Aafia, Fauzia’s younger sister by five years, is shown holding various pets, including a hamster, a cat, a goat and a lamb.
Fauzia Siddiqui, wearing a scarf wrapped loosely around her head, receives guests on the terrace of her house. The cook brings out food; a fountain bubbles in the background. Surrounded by a high wall, the terrace is an oasis in the middle of Karachi, a city of 12 million.
The Siddiquis are a model Pakistani family, modern and devout at the same time. The father was a surgeon, the mother is a housewife, and the family has lived in the British city of Manchester and in Zambia. All three children studied abroad. Mohammed, an architect, lives in Houston and Fauzia, a neurologist, worked at one of the best hospitals in Boston and lived in the same house as her sister for several years.
She returned to Karachi some time ago and now works at the city’s Aga Khan University. She says she would like to establish an institute to train neurologists. Helping the poor, says Fauzia, is a tradition in her family. Her sister Aafia, she says, also believed in helping the poor and was always there for other people. “My sister is innocent. She could never harm anyone. Something is simply not right,” she says. “There must have been a mistake.”
She picks up her photo albums again, holding onto them like a shipwreck victim clinging to a life preserver. Aafia at the piano. Aafia in a student dormitory, together with four Chinese students. A young woman who likes to pose for the camera and loves colorful silk dresses, but rarely wears a headscarf.
Can someone like this be “the most dangerous woman in the world”?
In Boston, Siddiqui led a life between two countries and between two worlds. They clashed when, after her 1995 graduation, her parents arranged her marriage. The bride had never seen her husband before the wedding. In fact, they married on the telephone — long-distance between Boston and Karachi.
Her husband, Amjad Khan, was an anesthesiologist. His father owned a pharmaceutical factory and the parents considered him a good catch. When he arrived in Boston, he came without presents or flowers. Instead, he could only complain about how much money the family had spent for a small ceremony, a hotel room, and a white silk dress with many pearls for Aafia, which made her look like a princess. It would have been better to donate the money to charity, he said. Weren’t there enough needy people in Pakistan?
FROM THE MAGAZINE
Siddiqui’s husband found a job in a Boston hospital, and the couple had two children, Ahmed and Mariam. They fought frequently, and Khan beat his wife and the children. Shortly after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Siddiqui flew to Karachi with her children, only to return to Boston a few months later. After six months the couple left the apartment, gave away the furniture and, on June 26, 2002, moved to Pakistan. When Amjad Khan separated from his wife a few weeks later, she was already pregnant with Suleman. Under Islamic law, divorce at that point was not possible.
She earned a PhD in neuroscience and wrote her thesis on learning through imitation. Her sister says Siddiqui had wanted to start a pre-school in Boston, where children would be taught using techniques she had studied.
This is the one side of Siddiqui, the smart academic and patient wife. But there is another side — the devout moralist, the energetic fundraiser.
As a young biology student she invited non-Muslims to dinner, touted Islam and gave Koran courses for converts. She met several committed Islamists through the Muslim student group at MIT. One was Suheil Laher, the group’s imam, an open advocate of Islamization and jihad before Sept. 11. For a short time, Laher was also the head of the Islamic charity Care International, which had nothing to do with the eponymous aid organization. The group, which was believed to have collected funds for jihadist fighters in Bosnia, Afghanistan and Chechnya, has since been disbanded.
Siddiqui collected money for Bosnian war orphans for Care International. Imam Abdullah Faaruuq, a black convert who wears a caftan over his blue jeans and polo shirt, remembers an event where Siddiqui collected shoes for Bosnian refugees and said, sobbing: “How can you have more than one pair of shoes when our brothers in Bosnia are freezing?”
“Sister Aafia was very committed, highly intelligent and extremely concerned about the fate of Muslims worldwide, and she believed that she could make a difference in the world,” says Faaruuq. She often came to the “Mosque for the Praising of Allah,” a shabby house of prayer in Roxbury, a working-class neighborhood of Boston. She ordered large numbers of English-language Korans and religious literature, stored the boxes at the mosque and later handed out the books in prisons.
But there are no indications that she supported the Islamists’ war against infidels.
The Diamond Smuggler
But there are also serious allegations against Siddiqui, most of them revealed only after her disappearance. For instance, the couple’s credit card was used to order night-vision goggles and body armor from an online store selling military equipment. The FBI questioned Amjad Khan for the first time in the spring of 2002, after those purchases. He told them that the equipment was for big-game hunting in Pakistan. Siddiqui was also questioned — only, as her attorney stresses, because she happened to be home at the time.
It was the first and last time the FBI ever contacted the couple.
Siddiqui is also accused of having opened a post office box in Maryland in late December 2002 for Majid Khan. Khan, a Pakistani national, is being held at Guantanamo and is suspected of having planned attacks on gas stations in the Baltimore area — on orders from Sheikh Mohammed.
And then there is the issue of the blood diamonds. This is the most serious accusation, because it seems to cement the suspicion that Siddiqui is a terrorist. In June 2001, a few months before the attacks on New York and Washington, Siddiqui is believed by some to have traveled to the Liberian capital Monrovia, on behalf of al-Qaida’s leadership, to buy diamonds worth $19 million (€15 million), which were used to fund al-Qaida operations.
Alan White, the former chief investigator of a United Nations-backed war crimes tribunal in Liberia, who investigated the trade in blood diamonds, still swears that it was Siddiqui who, on June 16, 2001, appeared in Monrovia under the name “Fahrem.” One of the witnesses was her driver who, according to White, identified Siddiqui.
All these allegations are a mix of facts and conjecture. Some testimony cannot be verified, or was obtained under questionable circumstances, or from witnesses who have since disappeared. But it is clear that the authorities have been unable to confirm any of these allegations, or else terrorism charges would have been leveled against Siddiqui by now. But it was apparently enough evidence to get the Muslim missionary caught in the net of terrorist hunters in the panic-filled years after Sept. 11, 2001.
The attorney for Siddiqui’s family, Elaine Whitfield Sharp, believes the husband was under suspicion in the United States from the start. “He played a shady role,” says the mother, Ismet Siddiqui, who has even suggested that Khan may have betrayed her daughter to save his own skin. Khan is no longer available for questioning. He has disappeared, and his family refuses to provide any information on his whereabouts, although he is believed to be in Saudi Arabia.
No one knows exactly why it was Aafia Siddiqui who was declared the most dangerous woman in the world four years ago. Presumably, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the key witness in the government’s case against Siddiqui and her alleged terrorist activities, played an important role in her arrest and detention.
However, on May 26, 2004, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft stood against a backdrop of seven enormous black-and-white photographs of most-wanted terrorists, among them Aafia Siddiqui. He stepped up to a microphone and said that the face of al-Qaida had changed. The new al-Qaida, according to Ashcroft, is young, female and travels with family members. “It constitutes a clear and present danger for America,” he said.
At this point, the supposed world’s most dangerous woman had been out of sight for more than 400 days. It was not until the evening of July 17, 2008 that she reappeared.
The Would-Be Bomber in a Burqa
Normally, suicide bombers are swiftly dealt with in Afghanistan. They are shot before they can blow themselves up. But because the suspect crouching on the ground in front of the mosque in Ghazni was a woman, and because a crowd of curious onlookers had already formed, police commander Ghani Khan decided to arrest her. Bashir, one of the police officers, recalls that the woman began cursing at the men as the police attempted to take her away. “You are infidels; don’t touch me!” she called out, three times, in her native Urdu.
At first no one understood what the woman was saying. Hekmatullah, the owner of a nearby shop who, like many Afghans, uses only one name, could translate Urdu for the police officers. He remembers that the woman had a Pakistani passport, and that she gave it to him and asked him to destroy it. He also remembers that her mobile phone rang twice, and that the calls were apparently coming from Pakistan.
Upon searching the two bags, police found no explosives, but small plastic bottles containing chemicals, a computer and documents, written in Urdu and English, about dirty bombs, biological weapons and recruiting jihadists.
In seeking to explain her presence at the mosque, Siddiqui says she had been ordered to follow a plan, and that the trip to Ghazni was a condition of her release. Her guards, she says, had placed the documents and chemicals in her bags.
Her attorney, Elaine Whitfield Sharp, says Siddiqui was set up. Perhaps the Americans no longer knew what to do with their prisoners. Did they send her to Ghazni, hoping that the police there would shoot her? The CIA calls it a “disposal order.”
“It would have been the perfect murder,” says Sharp. Siddiqui would have been prevented from testifying, though given the clearly incriminating documents in her bag, she could easily have been declared a terrorist. But why would someone traveling to Ghazni need plans of the Brooklyn Bridge, the Plum Island Animal Disease Center or documents describing ways to shoot down drones, the use of underwater bombs and gliders?
There are many odd elements to this arrest. Two days before it happened, Abdul Rahim Dessiwal, the public prosecutor in the nearby Andar district, received an anonymous call from a woman claiming that a female suicide bomber accompanied by a boy was on her way to Ghazni.
It is also odd that when Siddiqui was brought to the police station, she said the boy was her stepson, that his name was Ali Hassan and that he was an orphan she had adopted. There is a blurred video made by the police in Ghazni who, eager to show off their big catch, had called a press conference. In the video, Siddiqui says that her name is Saliha and that she is from the city of Multan in Pakistan.
She wears a black scarf over her head and face, apparently out of fear that she will be recognized. At one point she nudges the boy as if to remind to cover his face. In response he hides his face behind his sleeve so only his hair is visible. A DNA test performed a short time later determined that the boy was Ahmed, Siddiqui’s real son.
Today Ahmed lives with Fauzia Siddiqui in Karachi. He is severely disturbed emotionally, has nightmares and tells confusing stories about where he spent the past few years.
On the day after the arrest, a counterterrorism unit from Kabul turned up in Ghazni to investigate the case. The team included 10 to 12 Americans. They entered the small room where she was being held, which was partitioned by a curtain and had only one door. Siddiqui was sitting or standing behind the curtain. An Afghan, who wishes to remain anonymous, says that one of the Americans went up to her immediately, and that shots were fired a few seconds later.
Siddiqui says she passed out. She had been shot and was taken to the hospital at Bagram, where she underwent surgery and barely survived.
What exactly happened in those few seconds before she was shot is important, because the indictment brought by the district attorney in New York describes a version of the events that differs considerably from Siddiqui’s story. It alleges that she grabbed a US soldier’s M4 assault rifle, released the safety catch and fired several shots, but without hitting anyone, all within seconds. One of the soldiers, acting in self-defense, allegedly shot her.
A person would have to be familiar with the M4 to know how to release its safety catch. And would a US soldier put down his weapon when a wanted al-Qaida terrorist was sitting in the same room?
A psychological assessment of Siddiqui has lain before the judge in New York since early November. The report says she is not competent to stand trial. If the case does go to trial, and if the court takes on the military’s version of the indictment, it will not include any mention of Siddiqui’s alleged terrorist connections, there would be no need to prove any of the alleged terrorist acts.
And then the question of why Aafia Siddiqui, a gifted scientist, was once considered the most dangerous woman in the world, would remain a mystery forever.
Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan
INSAAN – ALLAH’S NOBLEST CREATION
“Verily, We have ennobled the Children of Aadam (Insaan), and
We have carried them on the land and the sea, and We have
nourished them with Tayyibaat (halaal and wholesome food),
and We have granted them great superiority over numerous
of Our creation.”
(Surah Al-Israa’, aayat 70)
Allah Ta’ala has deputed the Mu’min man to be His Vicegerent on earth. Insaan is a creation enjoying vast superiority over all other forms of creation. Even the Malaaikah had been commanded to prostrate to Aadam (alayhis salaam). The Sujood was commanded to illustrate Insaan’s superiority over even the sinless Malaaikah.
Insaan will remain ennobled and superior as long as he retains his insaaniyat (humanity). When man extinguishes his attribute of insaaniyat, then he degenerates to depths far below the level of even dogs and pigs.
The methodology by which secular education is imparted in this age, i.e. the western secular system, effaces almost every attribute of Islamic insaaniyat. All the noble attributes of moral excellence which sustain insaaniyat are utterly extinguished by the libertinism which is innate in the western system of education. The immoral, debased, perverted lifestyle of the students of western universities is vociferous and conspicuous evidence for this reality.
One of the prime effects of the immoral cult of westernism is sexual perversion – perversion which puts even the shayaateen to shame – perversion which not even the lowly beasts of the jungle indulge in. Western education cloaks sex perversion such as gayism. lesbianism, homosexuality, masturbation, oral sex and many other forms of sexual perversion initially unknown to even the shayaateen, with respectability. Even such perverts which put the shayaateen to shame are accorded respectability in western civilization.
By Mujlis Ulema S.A.
Among the vilest of Ibn Taimiyyah’s beliefs is his hypothesis of the universe being eternal. By eternity is meant existing independently without having been created. It is a never-ending existence. It has neither a beginning nor an ending. The eternity of the universe is the belief of the Greek philosophers. When Ibn Taimiyyah dabbled with philosophy he lost the path of Islam. He deviated into the kufr of the Greek philosophers. Their ‘rational’ arguments exercised a profound impact on him. He thus conjectured the belief: hawaaditu la awwala laha, that is, temporal things (things which come into existence from non-existence) have no beginning since they are always preceded by another temporal entity ad infinitum.
Although the coprocreep Salafis of our age are desperately labouring to clear Ibn Taimiyyah of this kufr, they fail miserably in the task for the simple reason that in at least seven of his books, Ibn Taimiyyah has explicitly propounded his theory of the eternity of the universe. Ibn Taimiyyah’s theory of kufr has attained the rank of Tawaatur in Ulama circles. The belated attempts to exonerate Ibn Taimiyyah from his kufr belief must be dismissed with contempt. The evidence to confirm his belief is overwhelming. Al-Baani, the devoted muqallid of Ibn Taimiyyah is the seal of confirmation. No one can honestly deny the attribution of the kufr concept to Ibn Taimiyyah, when Al-Baani himself conforms it.
We are not the first to refute this kufr of Ibn Taimiyah. Great Ulama of the past have thoroughly debunked the kufr and shirk which Ibn Taimiyyah had promoted with his satanic hypothesis of the universe being eternal in species. The coprocreep Salafis stupidly and monotonously moan that the great Ulama of the past did not understand the statements of Ibn Taimiyyah. These stupid coprocreeps labour under the misapprehension that everyone shares in their stupidity. Their contention is ludicrous. They are capable of fabricating statements of exoneration which they will attribute to Ibn Taimiyyah, but they will not be able to deny what Ibn Taimiyyah propounded in his seven kutub which are published and available. That Ibn Taimiyyah had in fact propounded the theory of the eternity of the universe, is undeniable. The denial of the Salafis is of no consequence and is dismissed with contempt.
This short treatise is based on the Refutation of Ibn Taimiyyah’s kufr beliefs authored by Shaikh Abdullah Al-Harari. Extracts from his kitaab, Al-Maqaalaatus Sunniyyah fi Kashfi Dhalaali Ahmad Bin Taimiyyah, are presented in paraphrased form for better comprehension of an English-reading public.
Mujlisul Ulama of S.A.
Jamaadil Ula 1434
Israeli officer writes: “It’s a shame the Arab whore didn’t die”
Dont we Muslims feel the pain our Brother’s and sister’s go through regularly, from murder to rape andtorture to death? Aren’t there ANY Arab countries out there to MAKE IT CLEAR TO ISRAEL THAT ENOUGH IS ENOUGH???
Nabi Sallallahu alaihi wasallam has said in a Hadeeth:
Beware of the cry of the oppressed, because there isn’t a barrier between it and Allah.”
Saturday March 02, 2013 01:43 by Saed Bannoura – IMEMC News
In response to Monday’s attack by a group of Israelis on a Palestinian woman in Jerusalem, Israeli police officer Ariel Shapiro posted on his Facebook page, “Good! It’s a shame the Arab whore didn’t die [in the attack]”.
The attack took place as the Palestinian woman waited at a light rail station in Jerusalem. A group of Jewish Israelis approached her and began punching and kicking her, then ripping off her headscarf.
A witness to the assault told the Israeli paper Ma’ariv, “There were about 100 Orthodox and yeshiva students who disembarked the tramway and spotted an Arab woman accompanied by an older man. It developed into arguing and yelling, and I don’t know what the content was that everyone jumped on her.” In addition, according to the witness, an Israeli security officer passively watched the attack and smiled as the attackers tore off the woman’s religious headscarf.
The Facebook posting by the Israeli officer is just the latest in a string of incidents involving Israeli soldiers posting offensive and disturbing content on social media. Just a week earlier, a photo posted by an Israeli soldier showing a Palestinian child in the crosshairs of a sniper rifle went viral on the internet – but the officer was not charged for posting it.
According to a recent study by the Israeli human rights group Yesh Din found that out of 103 investigations opened in 2012 into alleged offenses committed by Israeli soldiers in the occupied territories against Palestinians and their property, not a single one has so far resulted in any charges.
From 2009-2011, Yesh Din says in its latest report, just 2.62 percent of investigations led to charges. And from 2005-11, just six percent of criminal investigations launched by the Israeli army’s criminal investigation division against soldiers suspected of criminal violent activity against Palestinians and their property ended with charges being filed.
Former Israeli soldiers with ‘Breaking the Silence’ have described the ‘culture of impunity’ among Israeli soldiers, in which brutality is rewarded and extreme acts of violence go unpunished.
Many more of the disturbing photos posted in recent years by Israeli soldiers as ‘trophies’ on their Facebook pages can be seen at the link below. They include an eight-year old girl with blood all over her face after she was hit by a rubber-coated steel bullet while on the roof of her house, and instead of calling an ambulance, Israeli soldiers decided to detain her and her mother. Another well-publicized photo shows a dead Palestinian boy with blood all over his chest laid out in a position of ‘crucifixion’.
Feb 10th, 2013 | By Jeffry John Aufderheide
Have you ever asked your doctor about the safety of vaccines, only to have your concerns dismissed? If so, you’re not alone.
Doctors are quick to tell you there is nothing to worry about. They are quick to say something like, “The chance of your child having a bad reaction is one in a million.”
This is really incredible, since toxic vaccines are manufactured using monkey kidneys, mouse brains, fetal calf serum, and even aborted babies (human diploid cells). But as much as a doctor would like to dismiss your concerns, there is a magic question you can ask which will prove to you that vaccines are unavoidably unsafe. If you read the entire article, I promise it will be worth it.
Before I tell you the magic question, you should be aware of how the government handles unsafe products.
Here Is How the Government Handles Unsafe Products
To get a feel for how protected dangerous vaccines are from any scrutiny from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), let’s take a look at how they respond to other instances in which people fall ill or die from products they deem to be unsafe.
1. Contaminated Heparin Injections (2-28-2008): The FDA investigated all of Baxter Pharmaceuticals Healthcare Corporation’s multi-dose and single-dose vials of heparin sodium for injection, as well as HEP-LOCK heparin flush product, for adverse reactions. 246 deaths and many adverse side effects were reported following its use. 
Result: Product Recalled
2. Contaminated Cantaloupe (8-22-2012): The FDA and CDC investigated a multi-state outbreak of salmonella infections linked to cantaloupe originating from Chamberlain Farms Produce, Inc. 261 persons were infected with 3 deaths reported. 
Result: Product Recalled
3. Contaminated Peanut Butter (9-17-2012): The FDA and CDC investigated a multi-state outbreak of salmonella infections linked to Trader Joe’s Valencia Creamy Salted Peanut Butter, made by Sunland, Inc. Forty-two people were infected. 
Result: Product Recalled
4. Contaminated Spinach (11-2-2012): A total of 33 persons infected with E. coli were investigated by the FDA and CDC. It was traced back to Wegmans Organic Spinach and Spring Mix. 
Result: Product Recalled
5. Contaminated Steroid Injections (12-12-2012): The FDA and CDC investigated an outbreak of meningitis among patients who had received an epidural steroid injection. 
Result: Product Recalled
There are many examples of how the FDA and CDC operate, and some people even say this is proof that “the system” works. To a degree, the system does work—but contaminated vaccines are untouchable.
Here’s what you need to know.
Are Vaccines Contaminated? Well … Yes.
Vaccines have a long history of being filthy and contaminated.
This problem has been going on for a very long time and continues today. This is why it’s important for you to recognize how the vaccine industry has crafted specific language around vaccines and the manufacturing process using such words as “purified,” “purification process,” “lifesaving,” and “safe.” If you listen closely, you will hear doctors repeat the same language over and over to parents. The intention is to disarm you from asking questions.
I want to share this information with you so you can get a sense for how long this problem has been ignored.
A Cancer-Causing Monkey Virus Contaminated Vaccines?
In the 1950s and 1960s, the polio vaccine was manufactured using monkey kidneys to grow the viruses.
Bernice Eddy, who at the time was a scientist at the Division of Biologics Standards (DBS), discovered a major problem. Page 500 of the Executive Reorganization and Government Research of the Committee on Government Operations United States Senate, Ninety-Second Congress, Second Session. April 20, 21; and May 3, 4, 1972, states:
“The next and only serious vaccine crisis that has occurred since the polio episode was the realization in mid-1961 that a monkey virus later shown to cause tumors in hamsters was contaminating both polio and adenovirus vaccines. The virus, known as SV40, was entering the vaccines and, just as in the polio case was surviving the formalin [form of formaldehyde] treatment.
There were several states by which the full extent of the SV40 problem became known. First was the discovery in 1959-1960 by a DBS [Division of Biologics Standards] scientist, once again Bernice Eddy, thatan unknown agent in the monkey kidney cells used to produce polio and adenovirus vaccines would cause tumors when the cells were injected into hamsters.” (Emphasis mine)
Page 505 of the same congressional document declares,
“…even when the contaminating virus was found to be oncogenic [cancer causing] in hamsters, the DBS [Division of Biologics Standards – National Institute of Health] and its expert advisory committee decided to leave existing stocks on the market rather than risk eroding public confidence by a recall…There has been a tendency on the part of certain higher government circles to play down any open discussion of problems associated with vaccines…” (Emphasis mine)
Even to this day, the Centers for Disease Control plays damage control and minimizes any problems associated with the cancer-causing monkey virus that contaminated the polio vaccine. 
Phages Contaminated Vaccines?
In February, 1975 Gina Bari Kolata wrote an article entitled “Phage in Live Virus Vaccines: Are They Harmful to People?” Gina Bari Kolata wrote:
Almost 2 years ago, scientists at the Bureau of Biologics of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reported that all live virus vaccines are grossly contaminated with phage (viruses that infect bacteria). . . This finding presented a problem since federal regulations forbade extraneous material in vaccines, and no one knew whether phage are harmful to human beings or whether they could be removed from vaccines. The temporary solution was to amend the regulations so as to permit phage in vaccines.  [emphasis mine]
Where did the bacteriophage come from?
According to the article, the phages, which are viruses that infect bacteria, contaminate the “fetal bovine serum” collected at the slaughterhouse that subsequently is used as vaccine growth medium. The filthy process of bovine “fetus management” was encapsulated in this manner:
The room is dirty and, according to one spokesman, “one minute you have nothing to do and the next minute you are literally knee deep in fetuses.” 
Kolata noted that one unintended consequence from the contamination was the phage’s ability to trigger a different disease. She explained that a person who was given the polio vaccine contaminated with diphtheria phage could actually contract diphtheria!
FDA’s tolerance of vaccine contaminants manifested years later. For example, a court case decided in 1987 revealed, “Each seed virus used in manufacture shall be demonstrated to be free of extraneous microbial agentsexcept for unavoidable bacteriophage.” 
It Continues to This Day
This isn’t a problem that magically went away.
Bovine serum is frequently used as a growth medium as a part of the vaccine manufacturing process. It has been the major source of contamination in vaccines.  The most prevailing bovine contaminants are:
• bovine viral diarrhoea pestivirus
• parainfluenza virus type 3
• bovine herpesvirus 1
• bovine enterovirus type 4
• bovine orbivirus (bluetongue)
• bovine polyomavirus
• bovine parvoviruses [10, 11]
One paper suggests that vaccines contaminated with the bluetongue virus caused abortions in pregnant dogs. 
There are also patents to detect “new” pathogens that are likely contaminating other cell cultures to make flu vaccines. 
And to bring this full circle to the beginning of the article . . .
Contaminated Vaccines (1952–Today): The scientific literature has an abundance of evidence that vaccines are contaminated. The FDA and CDC have access to the very same information contained in this article—and much more. Vaccines are kept on the shelves even if they are contaminated because, if recalled, your confidence in vaccine safety and effectiveness would be eroded.
Result: Product Stays on the Shelf
Here is the magic 9-word question I promised you in the beginning of the article.
The 9 Magic Words
Here’s what I want you to do.
The next time you visit your doctor, after your doctor is done telling you how safe vaccines are, ask him this question with the 9 magic words: “If this vaccine injures my child, who is responsible?”
Your doctor will likely blush, get angry with you, or avoid the question altogether. What the doctor will avoid telling you is that vaccines are unavoidably unsafe! This means that even if vaccines are handled and given properly, some children will die or will be hurt.
The reality—and the answer to the question—is this: You are responsible if your child is injured!
The National Child Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 protects the manufacturer from liability for unavoidable adverse side effects as long as the vaccine is properly prepared and accompanied by the proper directions and warnings. 
The Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) also protects your doctor from any liability if a vaccine injures your baby.
If you decide to vaccinate your child, you do so at your own risk.
Your doctor can tell you vaccines are perfectly safe and your child will be “protected”, but the ones who are really “protected” are the doctors and the vaccine companies. What can you do? Take action right now.
6. Executive Reorganization and Government Research of the Committee on Government Operations United States Senate, Ninety-Second Congress, Second Session, April 20, 21; and May 3, 4, 1972.
9. Wade Baker and Rita Baker, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. United States of America, Defendant-Appellee. No. 86-5578. Submitted Dec. 4, 1986.
Pope Benedict XVI did nothing to punish pedophile priests or church seniors who looked the other way, according to US and Irish victims hoping his successor will focus on fighting sex abuse.
Barbara Blaine, founder and president of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, or SNAP, called the outgoing pope’s record “dismal”.
“He has made lofty statements. He has not matched those statements with deed or action. Under his reign, the children remained at risk,” Blaine said.
In recent years, the United States and Ireland have been among several countries rocked by successive sex scandals involving members of the Catholic clergy and Church higher-ups accused of covering up abuses.
This month, Los Angeles Archbishop Jose Gomez was forced under court order to release files on presumed cases of pedophilia involving some 100 clergymen.
Last year, Monsignor William Lynn of Philadelphia was sentenced to three to six years in prison for having hidden cases of sexual abuse and allowing at least two predatory priests to remain in posts in which they had contact with minors.
The US Conference of Catholic Bishops says that since 1950, more than 6100 priests have been accused of pedophilia. Some 16,000 victims have been identified, and $US2.5 billion have been spent on damages or rehabilitation therapy.
“This is not a US problem, this is a global problem,” Blaine said, stressing that the solution is “at the footsteps of Pope Benedict”.
“Even now in these next two weeks, he could take simple measures that would have wide-ranging positive impact to protect children and our church across the globe.”
The pope, who plans to resign on February 28, could publish the names of predatory priests online, as 30 American bishops have, or order bishops to report all cases of sexual abuse to the police, Blaine said.
“I’m very happy that the pope is resigning because he really did not do very much about clergy sexual abuse,” said Robert Hoatson, president of victims aid group Road To Recovery.
“The next pope has to tackle this issue. This is the most important issue because it concerns children, and it is a worldwide problem and the pope has to commission a group of experts to determine what has to be done to solve this problem.
“And if it means firing all the bishops that have covered up, so be it.”
He worried that the Church will “keep everything covered up” unless it is ordered to reveal information.
In Ireland, the victims group Survivors of Child Abuse also welcomed word that the pope is stepping down.
“This pope had a great opportunity to finally address the decades of abuse in the Church but at the end of the day, he did nothing but promise everything and in the end, he ultimately delivered nothing,” said spokesman John Kelly.
“The church needs to acknowledge that all of this happened. They need to acknowledge that they allowed the devil inside and had him reside there for 50 years.
“The church cannot move on,” he added. “This pope’s tenure has been plagued by scandals and that will continue unless the pope addresses the root causes and that can only start from the top.”